Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncc!lyndon@nexus.ca
From: lyndon@nexus.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: V32 will smash TB+ in a year (?)
Message-ID: <10522@ncc.Nexus.CA>
Date: 11 Nov 88 06:28:53 GMT
References: <10805@cup.portal.com> <1417@percival.UUCP> <11078@cup.portal.com>
Sender: lyndon@ncc.Nexus.CA
Reply-To: lyndon@nexus.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg)
Distribution: na
Organization: Nexus Computing Inc.
Lines: 63
In-reply-to: David@cup.portal.com (David Michael McCord)

In article <11078@cup.portal.com>, David@cup (David Michael McCord) writes:
>How many sites presently using trailblazers will find it necessary in the 
>near future to buy an additional 9600bps modems (v.32, natch) to support high 
>speed applications, instead of simply re-using their existing equipment?  
>What is that cost going to be?

I don't understand this. If my modems are at capacity, how am I going
to re-use them to get greater throughput?

We currently have seven TB+ modems in the card cage on 'ncc' and will
require additional cards before spring comes along. I find it highly
unlikely that we'll purchase V.32 when it comes time to expand.

>What if you are a new site, just starting to use uucp; and because all the 
>other uucp users talk telebit, you find you have to buy one too.  Yet, 
>because you have need to talk to the rest of the world, you have to buy 
>another modem type (v.32 again) for those applications.  What is your opinion 
>going to be regarding the original netadmins who bought telebit?  Aren't you 
>being forced to buy a modem and dedicate it to a particular application 
>rather than using a single type in ALL your applications?  What about the 
>possible economies of scale you are losing?  What is the cost of that?

I think it's safe to say that for the majority of Unix sites, your
uucp neighbors and the "rest of the world" are one and the same.

What are these mysterious services I'm missing out on by not having
V.32 modems?

I don't consider our TB's as being dedicated to "a particular
application." They serve ALL our applications (news, mail, file
transfer via uucp for our customers with Unix systems, file transfer
via kermit and xmodem for customers with PC's, customer dialup access to 
our various timeshare services, ...)

I can't think of anyone who regrets our advising them to buy a
Trailblazer. The only pissed off modem customers I have are the
ones I sold HST's to (due to the lousy throughput when running
uucp over them - around 100 CPS).

>My position was, and remains, that there are many hidden costs to the 
>trailblazers.  Maybe *you* haven't had to pay them...yet.  But you will.

I don't buy this. I only use Trailblazers. I know what's necessary to
make them do what I require. The "hidden costs" in having to support
a non-PEP modem in addition far outweigh any of your arguments.

>And if you seriously believe that v.32 will not be the 
>dominant modulation technique for high speed modems a year from now, or 
>decide to close your eyes and ignore the situation, I suppose you are 
>entitled to do so.  Obviously, I disagree with that, and time will tell whose 
>opinion corresponds more closely to reality, and who responded in a more 
>effective manner.

I'm saving a copy of your posting, and have an entry in my calendar
for Nov 10/89 :-)

If ANYONE reading this is using V.32 for dialup communications on a
Unix system, please send me some mail indicating what you're using
for modems and how many of each (V.32, PEP, 2400, etc) as well as
a description of the applications you are using them for. I'll post
a summary in a week or so.

--lyndon